Vendor prequalification
Tender scoring you write yourself — and can defend later
Open a project for the tender — scope, timeline, budget, a short reference like P001 — and write the evaluation on screen: sections, conditions, weights, gates. Every applicant is scored under the same rulebook, every score shows its working, and the report freezes the whole evaluation for the committee.
Two halves, sections, conditions — your rulebook, on screen
A score has two independently weighted halves, financial and technical. A section is worth a share of its half; a condition is worth a share of its section. You write all of it yourself — no developer needed.
The mechanics, in plain words
Read figures your way
Grade the latest audited year, the average of three, the strongest project, a total or a count — you choose how each figure is read. “Mean revenue of three audited years” is one condition, not a spreadsheet.
Targets and gates
A threshold is normally a target: reach it for full weight, fall short for the share you reached. Promote any threshold to a hard gate and missing it closes the whole half.
Computed figures
Some figures are asked of nobody. The debt ratio is derived from total liabilities and total assets — straight from the audited statements.
AI assessments
Project relevance scores a past project against this tender's description, 0–100, with reasoning beside it. Edit the tender and earlier readings are flagged stale; a re-run is offered, never forced.
Honest flags
incomplete something wasn't checked · stale measured against an older tender · gated a hard bar was missed. The flag travels with the number.
Stable ranking
Applicants rank in one stable order that never reorders itself between two reads. The table your committee saw is the table the auditor sees.
Change the rules — every score updates instantly
Change a weight and every applicant re-scores under the same new rulebook, instantly. Nobody is compared under two sets of rules, and no yesterday's number survives to contradict today's ranking.
Move the slider: the three applicants re-score and re-rank as you drag, exactly as the product does.
When the committee needs a number that stands still, you generate the qualification report — the record that never moves again.
Financial vs. technical
- 1Vendor B71.5
- 2Vendor A70.0
- 3Vendor C69.5
Illustrative example — three applicants, one rulebook, updated the moment a weight moves.
The qualification report: one evaluation, frozen
A report freezes one whole evaluation at one moment: the rulebook as it stood, every applicant in rank order, every criterion's working, and every flag. It goes to the committee, and it is what you open when an auditor asks — months later — which rules the shortlist was scored against.
Between reports, the evaluation stays live: weights can move, checks can complete, stale assessments can be re-run. The report is where it stops moving.
Bring one of your real tenders
The fastest way to judge Muahil is to rebuild the scoring sheet you already use — sections, weights, gates — and watch it grade a dossier.